And make you claustrophobic because you can't see more than five feet in any direction except across your aisle.

Not to mention the weight issue of those lengthy arms, and the safety issue of evacuating an aircraft full of suddenly-opened TVs, half of which cracked passengers on the head, and all of which are preventing an evacuation past a blocked aisle.

Listen up, and listen good. These are a nonsensical pipe dream, and they will *never* happen.

And they take up 16% more space. Why not just make current seats 16% more roomy? Oh, that's right, because airlines need to pack as many people as possible into the existing space. This will never happen.

Married to a stew, so my ticket costs the same as yours.And babies aren't allowed in Cathay Pacific First Class.And assholes are outside your private cubicle so you don't really see anybody unless you get up and walk around.

I think they should have it so the rows face each other. One row looks to the aft of the plane, one row looks to the forward part of the plane. Bam. Twice as much leg room. Except you'll have to interlock your legs with a stranger. And you can't recline. And you'll have to look at someone right in the face the entire flight.

I have vivid memories of flying from Frankfort, Germany to NYC. via Shannon, via Goose Bay in 1962 aboard a TWA Constellation. The seats were large and plush, plus I got to see the cockpit in action. Something like that wouldn't be allowed today. My next flight experience was in 1985 aboard a Piedmont 737 from Cincinnati to Denver. I realized how much air travel had come to resemble a flying Greyhound bus in the ensuing 23 years.

the airlines are supposed to voluntarily give up 16% of revenue and hope to get it on the back end through selling stuff?not gonna happen.what you need is a design that takes up no additional footprint room, but still offers more space for passengers by increasing the pitch for every seat and a leg rest, and an incentive for airline to do it (beyond the mere comfort of their passengers), perhaps by being substantially lighter so they save on gas.

Foxxinnia:I think they should have it so the rows face each other. One row looks to the aft of the plane, one row looks to the forward part of the plane. Bam. Twice as much leg room. Except you'll have to interlock your legs with a stranger. And you can't recline. And you'll have to look at someone right in the face the entire flight.

...and when the weak-bladdered granny in the window seat needs to go, again, you basically have sex while she climbs over you desperately shoving knees every which way while you writhe in pain...wonderful. Just wonderful.

Matthew Keene:I have vivid memories of flying from Frankfort, Germany to NYC. via Shannon, via Goose Bay in 1962 aboard a TWA Constellation. The seats were large and plush, plus I got to see the cockpit in action. Something like that wouldn't be allowed today. My next flight experience was in 1985 aboard a Piedmont 737 from Cincinnati to Denver. I realized how much air travel had come to resemble a flying Greyhound bus in the ensuing 23 years.

[www.aviationexplorer.com image 566x442]

Heh, old fart here, as well. Never got to fly a Connie, though.

First flight I recall was a puddle jumper into Bangor, ME, and I was practically IN the cockpit. No door, no nothing.

Giant t-storms over the field, open mic, you can hear the heavies opting to circle and wait.

Not our boy...his turn comes, it's "roger"...and we dive straight in between two gigantic black iron cloud columns crackling with lightning, and make a perfect crosswind landing in the rain.

Did anyone else looking at that design notice that it would be impossible to stow or store the tray once the person in front of you have reclined? The tray arms would have to go through the head of space of the reclining person.